• healthetank
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Beyond the issues of it being NaPo and the Fraser Institute being the main interviewee, using per person GDP as a measure of living standards seems… Wildly out of touch. There are no comments on consumer pricing index (with all its flaws).

    Literally they hinge their proof of “living standards” on average GDP.

    I don’t even know how to begin addressing that.

    • pipsqueak1984OP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Per capita GDP is far better than what the government is using, which is total GDP that is technically slowly rising but not faster than our population growth rate.

      CPI doesn’t give near a good picture as per capita GDP does. CPI increases can be at or below target levels but if per capita GDP growth is negative it’s still very bad. Having good per capita GDP data and bad CPI data and way, way less common, I’m even actually sure it’s ever happened in modern times.

      • healthetank
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Interesting.

        I wound up doing more of a dive into per capita GDP as a metric, and see more of the benefits of it, as well as why its used. I’m still not entirely sold on its benefits overall due to concerns over wealth inequality and “living standards” being averaged.

        Thanks for pointing out CPI vs GDP/C differences!

        • pipsqueak1984OP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          In theory wealth inequality can be getting worse as GDP per capita gets better, for sure.

          But conversely, if wealth inequality is getting better while the GDP per capita is going down, most people will still be worse off which definitely isn’t good.